even then its birth was premature; it had to be immediately withdrawn, and Bill No. 2 was produced; on examination Bill No. 2 proved to be so misshapen that on July 2 the Prime Minister announced that it would be necessary to make some most important changes in it; and finally, on July 17, the noble lord withdrew it. Thus, regularly every year, for the last four years the fairest promises have been made to these colonies, and their hopes have been raised; and regularly every year those promises have been broken, and the hopes of the colonists bitterly disappointed.

The repeated promise-breaking of the Colonial Office has produced the greatest discontent, and under the influence of angry feelings the colonists attribute the worst motives to the authors of their disappointment. They blame the people, the Parliament, and the statesmen of Great Britain. They say that the people and Parliament care nothing and know nothing about the colonies, but abandon them entirely to the Colonial Office. They accuse the statesmen of Great Britain, especially those connected with the Colonial Office, of being in their hearts unwilling to deprive themselves of power and patronage by bestowing free institutions on the colonies. Thus many of the colonists, unfortunately believing their rulers to be selfish and faithless, have begun to despair, and in despair to ask one another how they can redress their grievances. And in reply some of them answer that it was by rebellion that Canada obtained responsible government; that it is by threats and menaces that the men of the Cape are successfully striving to save their colony from

convict pollution; and they ask one another whether Anglo Australians are less energetic than the habitans of Canada, or less bold than the Boers of the Cape. That such language is used, and that such sentiments are entertained but too generally throughout some of the most important of colonial possessions, no one acquainted with those colonies can deny, or fail to lament, if, like myself, he be anxious for the preservation of the colonial empire of Great Britain.

I

I ask, can any honourable gentleman deny that discontent prevails throughout the colonies? answer that every year it is increasing in intensity and becoming more alarming; that from every quarter menacing sounds are heard, bitter complaints of colonial government, and fierce denunciations of the noble earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies. For instance, the Cape of Good Hope denounces him for having broken a solemn promise, attempted to insult and degrade an innocent colony, and driven its once loyal inhabitants to the brink of rebellion. Van Diemen's Land curses him for a breach of faith in renewing transportation, which now afflicts that ill-fated country with crimes too loathsome to mention. New South Wales, dreading a similar fate, answers with a threat of rebellion his proposal again to send convicts to that colony. His own colony of Victoria, of which he was once the chosen representative, now bids him defiance, and drives his convict ships from its shores. And even Western Australia indignantly protests against his making it a penal settlement. All Australia, Tasmania, New Zealand, and South Africa accuse him of having year after year raised

their hopes of obtaining free institutions; and year after year disappointed those hopes, and, on some flimsy pretext, broken his word. British Guiana, Jamaica, and the rest of the West Indies look upon him as their worst foe, and as the enemy to economy and retrenchment. Canada taunts him with its trembling Governor' rewarded for his prowess with a British peerage, and makes his policy a pretext for seeking to be annexed to the United States. Ceylon and the Ionian Islands accuse him of having with indecent haste approved of and rewarded deeds that disgrace the British name, and in the opinion of Europe rival in atrocity those of Haynau and Radetzky. And Malta taxes him with conduct unworthy of an Englishman, in refusing asylum to political exiles, and thus setting a bad example, of which the despots of Europe too gladly avail themselves. Thus, from every quarter, north, south, east, and west, from Canada and Australia, from the West Indies and South Africa, charges are brought against the present Secretary of State for the Colonies of injudicious appointments, ignorance, negligence, vacillation, breach of faith, and tyranny. Though all the colonies unanimously cry out against the noble earl, yet I maintain that it is not the individual, but the system, which is the real cause of the existing discontent; and that as long as that system is unreformed, it matters not who may be the Secretary of State for the Colonies, discontent. will prevail throughout the colonies; and every year it will increase in intensity, menace the stability of our colonial empire, and threaten its forcible tearing asunder, to be accompanied perhaps by hateful civil 1 Lord Elgin.

wars, with vast expenditure and much misery both to this country and to the colonies. To avert this impending danger, Parliament must hasten to make a complete and thorough reform of our system of colonial government. There is no time to be lost. There has been too much delay already.

The noble lord the Prime Minister challenges those persons who blame the existing system of colonial government, and at the same time wish to retain our colonial empire, to point out the line of policy which they think should be adopted. I will attempt to grapple with the challenge of the noble lord; not by expressing in abstract terms my opinions with respect to colonial polity, but by offering some observations on the provisions of the measure which the noble lord proposes to introduce for the government of the Australian colonies.

With regard to the government of a colony there appear to me to be two distinct questions to be considered: first, the form of government; secondly, the powers to be delegated to the colonial authorities. With respect to the form of government proposed for the Australian colonies, the noble lord said that the present Bill is a reproduction of the Bill of last year; and the noble lord rather surprised me when he declared that by means of that Bill he intended to give to the Australian colonies a copy of the British Constitution, that copy being the present constitution of New South Wales. Now, let me describe to the Committee what is the constitution of that colony. Suppose that 110 members of this House had seats in virtue of holding office under the Crown, and for as long only as they held office; and that in addition to

the 110 official members, there were 110 other members who were appointed members by the Government at the commencement of every Parliament, making in all 220 votes at the disposal of the executive. Suppose, likewise, that the House of Lords were abolished, and that, instead of her Gracious Majesty Queen Victoria, we had a governor of the ordinary description; then we should enjoy the benefits of the British Constitution after the fashion of New South Wales. How would such a constitution work with us? We should be divided into two permanent factions, actuated by the fiercest hatred of each other. One party would pride itself upon being the representatives of the people, and would look with scorn and contempt upon the other party as the base and subservient tools of the Government. No question would be considered to be settled which was decided against the wishes of the elective members, and the official and nominated members would be held up to public odium and hatred if they ever presumed to defeat the wishes of the elective members. It is evident that in theory such a constitution is absurd, and that in practice it must be a very bad

one.

The second question is, What powers ought to be delegated to the colonial authorities? This appears to me to be a far more important question than that of the mere form of a colonial government. I am sorry to find, from the statement of the noble lord, that he intends that the Colonial Office shall retain its present arbitrary power of disallowing all Acts of the colonial legislatures, and of otherwise interfering in the internal affairs of the colonies. This